PDA

View Full Version : Stephen King and his brother, Nosmo.



scarletpeaches
01-27-2012, 06:04 PM
Nosmo King? Geddit?

*sigh* Anyhoo...

This is inspired by the Books You've Thrown Across the Room with Force thread in the Novels forum, and the conversation about Stephen King which began around about this page (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47391&page=42).

I've only read a handful of King books -- Rose Madder, Bag of Bones, Dreamcatcher and a few others, and I wouldn't call myself a mad keen King afficionado.

Those who are more familiar than I with his work have referenced a difference between his 'too stoned to remember writing this shit, 'cause man, I was off my tits' books and his 'clean and sober' works.

I was just wondering what yous guys thought about this. Is there a difference between the two Kings? Do you think the drink and drugs made his books better or worse? Had no effect?

For those who see a difference, what exactly would you say that difference is? Were his books darker back then? More psychological now?

Which of his books would you say best illustrate this difference, if there is one?

Perks
01-27-2012, 06:11 PM
I've enjoyed the stuff he's put out in the last few years, sober as a judge, as among his best work. For me, the endings are more satisfying.

Back in the day, he was sometimes (often) known to Frankenstein an ill-matched ending onto what was clipping along quite nicely, and It is the only book I've ever actually thrown.

These days, I can't wait to get my hands on the latest King. It's taken a lot of therapy and peaceful solitude, but I'm learning to trust again.

Carmine
01-27-2012, 06:19 PM
Nosmo -- ha! I've read a fair amount of King. I can't make a broad statement about the effect of his substance abuse on the darkness his work, but I will say that there have been very bleak works throughout his career, from The Shining to Misery to Full Dark, No Stars.

The worst of King's works I've ever read is The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. It was so badly written and dull I wondered if King had really written it himself. I read later that it was written during a period of substance abuse. In that case, I could see a connection between his addiction and his writing, but it showed up in the quality, not the style or theme, of the work.

Dr.Gonzo
01-27-2012, 06:28 PM
Nice, Peaches.

I'm going to jump in and add Bachman into the mix, straight off. King wrote meaner when he wrote as him. Less subtle. Much more heavy-handed. There's something diry about that bastard, and I think he came to an end around the time King got rid of his monkey.

I find in general that the fantasy elements started coming into King's work when he stopped drinking and sniffing. I can't say which of his periods I prefer, because I like and dislike work from both times. In truth, there's probably more I like from the time he spent wankered behind his desk. But my favourite he wrote once he'd sobered--Bag of Bones.

If I did notice a drop in quality, I don't know if I could say it's because he's stopped drinking. I see similarities to some bands when I look at a lot of writers. They start to lose their edge. They can't write about life on the curb when they're sat in mansions, wiping their arses with 50 notes.

Maybe that's why he wrote more of the fantasy kind of stuff.

swvaughn
01-27-2012, 06:29 PM
I've enjoyed the stuff he's put out in the last few years, sober as a judge, as among his best work. For me, the endings are more satisfying.

Back in the day, he was sometimes (often) known to Frankenstein an ill-matched ending onto what was clipping along quite nicely, and It is the only book I've ever actually thrown.

These days, I can't wait to get my hands on the latest King. It's taken a lot of therapy and peaceful solitude, but I'm learning to trust again.

I'd definitely agree with this. I adored older Stephen King stuff -- his early short story and novella collections like Skeleton Crew, Night Shift, and Different Seasons were great. I loved Carrie and Cujo and The Dark Half and Misery, Eyes of the Dragon... so many titles, can't remember them all.

I think the first King book that pissed me off was Wizard and Glass. Years between books 3 and 4 of the Dark Tower series... and I get a novel-length flashback?!?! GRRRRR.

Things kind of went downhill for me with King's stuff for a while. There were some really eek-worthy books. I'm not sure when he quit the drugs, but there was a noticeable decline in his work at some point.

(Just what was up with Desperation/The Regulators, hereafter known as The Desperegulators? I think I liked one of those -- but really, writing the same book twice, except one is by your pseudonym? Come on, Steve...)

And then came Duma Key. Which I LOVED. With a capital Love. Now I'm all about the King again. :D


The worst of King's works I've ever read is The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. It was so badly written and dull I wondered if King had really written it himself. I read later that it was written during a period of substance abuse. In that case, I could see a connection between his addiction and his writing, but it showed up in the quality, not the style or theme, of the work.

Whereas I enjoyed that book quite a bit. I found the girl's perspective refreshing, and thought he captured her feelings/emotions/reactions while being lost in the wilderness quite well.

The ending was a little weird, but I forgave it.

Of course, everyone is allowed their own opinions. :)

Amadan
01-27-2012, 06:31 PM
He is a much mellower and more mature writer now. His books have actual endings that aren't pulled out of some coke-fueled nether orifice. So in that respect, his writing has undoubtedly improved.

On the other hand, the books he wrote when he was a coke-fiend were pure junkie-fueled imagination without restraint (or taste, or filters). His flights of imagination were both spectacular and horrific. Tommyknockers is often considered one of his worst books, and while I agree that it wasn't good overall, it was damned creepy. Cujo is the one he says he doesn't even remember writing, but it combined two of his favorite themes (domestic violence, and the commonplace and familiar becoming a source of unspeakable horror), brilliantly.

It is epic, scary, creepy, and would blow every so-called "YA" novel off the stands with how superior it is to everything labeled YA today, except that it's obviously not YA despite the protagonists, and the ending, well, it would be a spoiler to describe it but everyone who's read it knows about that ending and says "Stephen King, WTF were you thinking?!"

Even his other mediocre works (Christine, Pet Semetary) were magnificently atmospheric and creepy. I mean, I read Christine and didn't want go driving in the fog because I could imagine this demonic black car stalking me.

In contrast, I really did like Bag of Bones, but you could tell he was transitioning to becoming a Serious Writer. It's more mature but not as balls-out crazy. And a lot of his later works, from Gerald's Game to Lisey's Story, rework the same themes he's written repeatedly. (I would start with Dolores Claiborne if you want to read one of his best entries in his "abused-woman-striking-back" series.)

I haven't read Under the Dome yet, but it sounds a lot like he's reusing elements of The Stand and some of the ideas from his short stories.

His short story collections are also worth reading, though they vary in quality just like his novels.

I'm also very fond of his Bachman novels. They're some of my favorites, actually.

crunchyblanket
01-27-2012, 06:39 PM
Originally Posted by Carmine http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6952669#post6952669)
The worst of King's works I've ever read is The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. It was so badly written and dull I wondered if King had really written it himself. I read later that it was written during a period of substance abuse. In that case, I could see a connection between his addiction and his writing, but it showed up in the quality, not the style or theme, of the work.


I actually loved that book, but each to their own.

One thing I did notice is that his older books seem much more...chaotic, for want of a better word. Like his newer books seem to have a clear idea of where they're going, even if they meander on the way. Reading some of his older books - Pet Semetary is a good example, I think - it's almost like he was writing on autopilot, not really knowing where the story was going until he got there. That might explain his inability, in the older books, to actually end a story. I agree that he's actually improved a lot in that regard (The ending to the Dark Tower series was a love-it-or-hate-it type ending but damn, I loved it)

His newer books seem more closely tied to one another, like most of them occur in the same tight knit universe. I seem to remember The Stand kicking that one off, and The Dark Tower picking it up in earnest.



I haven't read Under the Dome yet, but it sounds a lot like he's reusing elements of The Stand and some of the ideas from his short stories.



I really didn't like Under The Dome, alas. He's already done that story, and better.

scarletpeaches
01-27-2012, 06:41 PM
Under the Dome (which I own, but haven't yet read) reminds me of the Simpsons movie.

Dr.Gonzo
01-27-2012, 06:44 PM
Under the Dome (which I own, but haven't yet read) reminds me of the Simpsons movie.

That's exactly what I thought when I first heard of it. The crazy fucker was probably in his cabin, rocking in his chair, watching Spider-Pig and thought, What if?

Perks
01-27-2012, 06:48 PM
Under the Dome (which I own, but haven't yet read) reminds me of the Simpsons movie.
He said he was absolutely surprised when that film came out, because he'd been fiddling around with Under the Dome for decades by then.

kelator
01-27-2012, 07:02 PM
Didn't he start Under the Dome years ago and trunk. Maybe the movie re-lit a fire.

Anyway I find he has hits and misses from both periods. However I don't know if he has changed editor, but i think his newer works could do with better editing.

I enjoyed Under the Dome but felt it could have had entire chapters cut out and characters combined. I haven't read 11/22/63 but judging from the size of it I fear it could be the same

seun
01-27-2012, 07:19 PM
As far as I know, King wrote his worst book while stone cold sober.

Lisey's Story.

It doesn't work as literary or genre horror. It's totally flat with two of his most boring characters and oh my god if I ever read about bools or bad gunky again I'm going to fucking kill everyone in the world.

OK, now that's out of the way...his best work in terms of outright horror, emotional impact or imagination comes from when he was smashed out of his head and from his sober days so I don't think there's a point in terms of quality where he went from one to the other. For my money, his best works (again in terms of horror, emotion or imagination) include Cujo, 'Salem's Lot, It, The Bachman Books, the DT series, Rose Madder, Pet Semetary, From A Buick 8, The Stand, Gerald's Game, 11.22.63, and several of his shorter pieces.

quicklime
01-27-2012, 07:26 PM
Nosmo King? Geddit?

*sigh* Anyhoo...

This is inspired by the Books You've Thrown Across the Room with Force thread in the Novels forum, and the conversation about Stephen King which began around about this page (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47391&page=42).

I've only read a handful of King books -- Rose Madder, Bag of Bones, Dreamcatcher and a few others, and I wouldn't call myself a mad keen King afficionado.

Those who are more familiar than I with his work have referenced a difference between his 'too stoned to remember writing this shit, 'cause man, I was off my tits' books and his 'clean and sober' works.

I was just wondering what yous guys thought about this. Is there a difference between the two Kings? Do you think the drink and drugs made his books better or worse? Had no effect?

For those who see a difference, what exactly would you say that difference is? Were his books darker back then? More psychological now?

Which of his books would you say best illustrate this difference, if there is one?


I think it is hard to say, because his books now seem to be more circomspect and "deeper". Not all have been good, not all his early books were, but I'm not sure how much of the difference was "look ma, no coke" and how much was just aging as a writer.

I DO believe the first couple books he wrote after cleaning up (thinking Dreamcatcher for one) were really bad, but I think it took him some time to recover both from drugs and learning to write sober, and also his van accident (Dreamcatcher was his first after the van I believe, he'd been sober awhile by then IIRC)

Phaeal
01-27-2012, 07:37 PM
I'd say the main lesson to take from Stephen King's working life is: He's never stopped working. He's written sober. He's written drunk. He's written while recovering from horrendous injuries. He's written while working maggotty laundry jobs. He's written on long after he could have snuggled down into his royalties for the rest of his life.

Damn good lesson, that.

Thump
01-27-2012, 07:41 PM
I'd say the main lesson to take from Stephen King's working life is: He's never stopped working. He's written sober. He's written drunk. He's written while recovering from horrendous injuries. He's written while working maggotty laundry jobs. He's written on long after he could have snuggled down into his royalties for the rest of his life.

Damn good lesson, that.

I'm putting that in my signature. I'm getting rid of the Cat and Baby collision, that's how much I like this post :D

Williebee
01-27-2012, 07:43 PM
I'd say the main lesson to take from Stephen King's working life is: He's never stopped working. He's written sober. He's written drunk. He's written while recovering from horrendous injuries. He's written while working maggotty laundry jobs. He's written on long after he could have snuggled down into his royalties for the rest of his life.

Damn good lesson, that.

ayup.

KathleenD
01-27-2012, 08:05 PM
Duma Key made me yell "the man is BACK." I pulled an all-nighter finishing that sucker. Though for my money, the Hearts in Atlantis novella set at the University of Maine is one of the all time great short novels.


It's taken a lot of therapy and peaceful solitude, but I'm learning to trust again.

That's almost exactly how I felt ;) I loved his older stuff, I love his new stuff, but there's a big gap right after he got sober where I just don't enjoy the work.

I don't think it's anything to do with how good the ideas were - I think he had a certain rhythm, kind of a groove he used to hit when he was abusing drugs. When he took away what had been a huge chunk of his life, he had to rebuild all the systems from scratch. (Or as Quicklime said, learn to write sober.) The books were wobbly.

But he never stopped writing.

Ironically, the accident that almost killed him seems to have knocked him into somewhere solid. If I were qualified to have an opinion, I'd probably say he used to bullshit about mortality very, very well, but now he gets it.



One thing I did notice is that his older books seem much more...chaotic, for want of a better word. Like his newer books seem to have a clear idea of where they're going, even if they meander on the way. Reading some of his older books - Pet Semetary is a good example, I think - it's almost like he was writing on autopilot, not really knowing where the story was going until he got there.


His "On Writing" kind of explains that - all his stuff, pre-accident, was written with a single what-if scenario. He specifically said he didn't know where the stories were going until he got there.

As he's hit full maturity as a writer, he's more in control of things, although not entirely (because he doesn't want to be, not because he doesn't know how).

Drachen Jager
01-27-2012, 08:21 PM
When I read a book I'm pretty dedicated. If I make it through the first few chapters I finish it almost all the time. The only exception was King's Insomnia. I'd read other novels of his before, but haven't bothered since. That experience totally turned me off him as a novelist, although I did enjoy On Writing.

Jamesaritchie
01-27-2012, 08:32 PM
The worst of King's works I've ever read is The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. It was so badly written and dull I wondered if King had really written it himself. .

I loved that book, too. I think it was one of his best, but I believe it was written shortly after his real substance abuse period.

Jamesaritchie
01-27-2012, 08:38 PM
I think King's first few novels were great. Then, for me, he went into a bit of a tail spin. He came out of it with Bag of Bones, and has been getting better and better.

He has written a couple of books in the last ten years that I didn't like, but there was nothing at all wrong with the writing, or with the stories. They just weren't my cup of tea. But, for the most part, I think he writes better now than he ever has.

I'm another who sees his accident as a turning point. It seems to have knocked some sense into him.

But I'll also add this. As a novelist, King is good, but as a short story, novelette, novella writer, he's one of the best who ever put pen to paper. Many of his shorter works are phenomenal. And have made the best movies. Particularly Stand By Me and Shawshank Redemption.

quicklime
01-27-2012, 08:49 PM
But I'll also add this. As a novelist, King is good, but as a short story, novelette, novella writer, he's one of the best who ever put pen to paper. Many of his shorter works are phenomenal. And have made the best movies. Particularly Stand By Me and Shawshank Redemption.


Quick derail for JAR:

I agree, esp. short stories. But what's your take on his shorts, because unlike his novellas, I found his earlier shorts seemed far, far better than his more recent (post "Nightmares and Dreamscapes" forays. Not always; I really liked the one with the old couple talking about the husband's dream--that one he really hit home both with the slow-dawning horror and also the reality of an older and somewhat distant couple, but for the most part, his earlier shorts in Nightmares, Night Shift, and Skeleton Crew were a better lot, imho

kaitie
01-27-2012, 09:26 PM
I'm a fan of his newer works compared to the older ones. I loved Firestarter, and he has a couple of other earlier ones that I actually do appreciate to a degree (The Stand), but for the most part I'm not a fan of a lot of it, even the "classics" like It, Christina, Kujo, etc. The writing style was just not something I appreciated, and honestly even the stories weren't as good, IMO.

While he has a couple of more recent books that I also disliked, it was more for story than writing (Cell), and the books I think are sheer brilliance are definitely the newer ones. I think Hearts in Atlantis was great, and a lot of the stuff that's come out in the past few years has been really impressive on multiple levels.

firedrake
01-27-2012, 09:32 PM
I love his earlier books up to and including 'It'. Then he went off the rails a bit. I loathed 'Rose Madder' and 'Delores Claiborne' was just sick. But, he's come back in style. I loved 'Under the Dome' and I have 'Duma Key', I just haven't got round to reading it yet.

I've always loved King. I've grown up with his books and I love that his books have been a 'constant' in my reading life. I'd be hard pressed to choose a favourite. Perhaps 'Salem's Lot' or 'It'. He is just so good at nailing small town America and scary, oddball characters.

Drachen Jager
01-27-2012, 09:42 PM
I loved that book, too. I think it was one of his best, but I believe it was written shortly after his real substance abuse period.

Do you even read what other people write before responding?

dgrintalis
01-27-2012, 09:56 PM
I'd say the main lesson to take from Stephen King's working life is: He's never stopped working. He's written sober. He's written drunk. He's written while recovering from horrendous injuries. He's written while working maggotty laundry jobs. He's written on long after he could have snuggled down into his royalties for the rest of his life.

Damn good lesson, that.

This, a million times over.

crunchyblanket
01-27-2012, 10:10 PM
When I read a book I'm pretty dedicated. If I make it through the first few chapters I finish it almost all the time. The only exception was King's Insomnia. I'd read other novels of his before, but haven't bothered since. That experience totally turned me off him as a novelist, although I did enjoy On Writing.

'Insomnia' is not only my favourite King book, but one of my all-time favourites. Although he has said (in 'On Writing', I think) that he thinks it's too stiff and try-hard. And my grandad, who's a big King fan, can't stand it.

Dr.Gonzo
01-27-2012, 10:17 PM
I remember King saying something like that, Crunchy. I think he put it down to him plotting it.

Perks
01-27-2012, 10:21 PM
'Insomnia' is not only my favourite King book, but one of my all-time favourites. Although he has said (in 'On Writing', I think) that he thinks it's too stiff and try-hard. And my grandad, who's a big King fan, can't stand it.I also love it, but I know quite a few people who didn't care for it.

bearilou
01-27-2012, 11:13 PM
I'm putting that in my signature. I'm getting rid of the Cat and Baby collision, that's how much I like this post :D

Phaeal is very quotable. *nodnod*

Prisoner24601
01-27-2012, 11:43 PM
But I'll also add this. As a novelist, King is good, but as a short story, novelette, novella writer, he's one of the best who ever put pen to paper. Many of his shorter works are phenomenal. And have made the best movies. Particularly Stand By Me and Shawshank Redemption.

Yes, yes, yes. While I've enjoyed a lot of his novels (especially Misery and It), it's his short fiction that really stands out to me. Stories like Nona, A Good Marriage, Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption, All That You Love Will Be Carried Away, 1408, and The Virus Road Travels North are some of my all time favorite short fiction.

Dr.Gonzo
01-28-2012, 12:13 AM
That's 'The Road Virus Heads North'. And I agree. His novellas are spectacular.

Susan Littlefield
01-28-2012, 12:52 AM
For those who see a difference, what exactly would you say that difference is? Were his books darker back then? More psychological now?

Which of his books would you say best illustrate this difference, if there is one?

I've only noticed the difference in his books since he had that horrible accident about 10 or so years ago. I think he became clean prior to that time.

I can't name any specific books to illustrate the difference in his writing prior to drugs and after, but I can say that I have been drawn to come of his more recent books such as The Dune, Duma Key, Full Dark No Stars, Bag of Bones, Secret Windows.

I think it's the type of books I like, not necessarily that his writing has changed except that it's evolved.

I will read just about anything King puts out.

mirandashell
01-28-2012, 01:12 AM
It's possible that when I say his works aren't the same, as I did to kick this new thread off, I'm referring to the real dip in form he had between getting sober and getting run over. Quite a few people have said to me that he is writing better since the accident.

My problem is that I really went off him and now I don't really want to read any horror. Which is not him, just me getting older, I think.

quicklime
01-28-2012, 01:28 AM
It's possible that when I say his works aren't the same, as I did to kick this new thread off, I'm referring to the real dip in form he had between getting sober and getting run over. Quite a few people have said to me that he is writing better since the accident.

My problem is that I really went off him and now I don't really want to read any horror. Which is not him, just me getting older, I think.


read it, dammit! read it!!

honestly, in some respects he is a different author. still a horror guy, but old king is to new king much like either one is to Peter Straub, for example.....they all cover similar ground in different fashions. In Duma, for example, you really get that King is aware he's getting old. And he waxes about life in a way he hasn't since Hearts in Atlantis and The Body. there is a lot of horror there in a man losing his family, part of his mind, and rehabbing back to a shell of his former life--very real horror, all entirely outside of the monster.

BTW, Hearts isn't horror really. And much of Full Dark is horror in a vein closer to Oates or someone than the guy who came up with "shit-weasels"

jennontheisland
01-28-2012, 01:40 AM
I don't know about King, but Metallica sure went down hill once they got clean.

quicklime
01-28-2012, 01:45 AM
was it getting clean, or getting older, becoming the folks who shop bananna republic, being spent creatively, etc???

Justice was one of the last albums I liked, but they made a considerable push from that and the black album forward to be more mainstream, it seemed......

shaldna
01-28-2012, 01:29 PM
Those who are more familiar than I with his work have referenced a difference between his 'too stoned to remember writing this shit, 'cause man, I was off my tits' books and his 'clean and sober' works.

I was just wondering what yous guys thought about this. Is there a difference between the two Kings? Do you think the drink and drugs made his books better or worse? Had no effect?

I think so.

In his addiction fuelled work there is a much stronger element of 'the monster' as horror, less subtle than his later stuff, but in many ways more brutal - nightmarish.

Two of my favourite King novels, and I'm not a fan, were Pet Sematery and Cujo - the latter he doesn't even remember writing because he was so smashed at the time.

Dr.Gonzo
01-28-2012, 02:19 PM
Last year I read some classic King that I hadn't read in years. When I say classic, I mean: 'Salem's Lot, Pet Sematery, The Stand, Misery. You know what hit me, and I think this is strange, but I don't like The Shining. I've read it twice now. Struggled both times. One of his most famous works. His Mickey Mouse. I like the film, but the book just doesn't do it for me.

It's a book that he's really known for. But you don't see fans mention it much. Has it been mentioned in here before I brought it up? I haven't noticed it. Maybe it's the film that's made the name bigger. It's just that I always had the impression that The Shining was King's Mickey Mouse. Not so, it seems. Hmm? :)

Also, in line with the thread, Jack in the book is a raging pisshead and I've heard King talk about the lack of subtleties between fiction and reality in this case.

firedrake
01-28-2012, 02:48 PM
I don't like 'The Shining' either. Never did.

I love 'Pet Semetary' but, since I had my son, I just can't read it any more. It's just too disturbing, even if it is an awesome read. Does that make sense?

Dr.Gonzo
01-28-2012, 02:52 PM
I don't like 'The Shining' either. Never did.

I love 'Pet Semetary' but, since I had my son, I just can't read it any more. It's just too disturbing, even if it is an awesome read. Does that make sense?

It does.

I'm an... active sleeper. I do a lot of things. I swear. Gymnastics. Shit like that. Last year I'm reading PS and I sit up in the middle of the night, fast asleep, flatten the quilt out, and say, 'I can't stop thinking about that dead boy.'

Lucky for me, the missus is familiar with the story. She knew what I was on about.

crunchyblanket
01-28-2012, 03:18 PM
You know what hit me, and I think this is strange, but I don't like The Shining.


I don't actively dislike it, but it's one of his weaker books in my opinion. It translated beautifully to film (one of the few good King film adaptations, imo) but the actual book is not his best work by some margin.

seun
01-28-2012, 03:22 PM
I'm in the minority when it comes to the film of The Shining. For me, the book had a lot of heart in it. Kubrick's film had no heart at all for me. It looked great but there wasn't much below the surface.

Ken
01-28-2012, 04:20 PM
... to state the obvious, which is a derail, sorry about that, King is more than a writer. He's a family man who has got friends who also care about him. I am sure they appreciate that he's clean now. Sure, writing stories is important, but having a nice life is too. So even though I haven't read any of his recent works, I think he made the right decision, overall. And he'll probably be around longer thanks to that allowing him to write more and enjoy the admiration of his fans. Now back to your regular stationed broadcast -->

Amadan
01-28-2012, 07:06 PM
... to state the obvious, which is a derail, sorry about that, King is more than a writer. He's a family man who has got friends who also care about him. I am sure they appreciate that he's clean now. Sure, writing stories is important, but having a nice life is too. So even though I haven't read any of his recent works, I think he made the right decision, overall. And he'll probably be around longer thanks to that allowing him to write more and enjoy the admiration of his fans. Now back to your regular stationed broadcast -->

King also clearly believes he made the right decision and is much happier. He talks about it very honestly in On Writing. I don't think any of his fans are saying "It's a shame he got clean, because he wrote some of his best work while smashed." It's just an ironic observation.

COchick
01-28-2012, 08:35 PM
I'm a fan of King overall, but I've found both old and new books that don't work for me.

I have noticed that his newer stuff is easier to follow, even after 800 or so pages. It's like he's more coherent or something. For example, I can never read all of It. There's just so much skipping around and it's so blocky and chunky and damn wordy that I find myself moving ahead. But 11/22/63....yeah, I loved every word of that book.

In fact, The Stand and 11/22/63 are now tied for my favorite King books.

Dr.Gonzo
01-28-2012, 08:50 PM
I'm gonna have to read that.

Ken
01-28-2012, 10:15 PM
He talks about it very honestly in On Writing.

... have really got to read this book. Everyone but me has, as it seems.

-------------------------------------------------

Thnx for the recommendation, CBlanket VV

crunchyblanket
01-28-2012, 10:44 PM
... have really got to read this book. Everyone but me has, as it seems.

It's definitely worth a gander. For my money, it's one of the best books about the craft out there.

thebloodfiend
01-28-2012, 11:18 PM
I have a love/hate relationship with Stephen King.

I've seen almost all of the movies that were ever made off his stories. My favorites were Misery, Dolores Claiborne, Shawshank Redemption, Apt Pupil, Stand by Me, and The Shining, probably because they had good directors and decent star power.

I saw the movies before I read the books, which probably influenced which books I decided to read. For instance, I've seen The Stand just about a million times and it's very watchable, but I hate it. I know I'd hate the book because it has one of his wtf endings. Like with It.

I've never been interested in The Shining. While it translated well to the big screen, it doesn't seem like one of those things you'd read for enjoyment. It's too contained and most of the elements are visual and, imo, introspectiveness (sp?) isn't King's forte.

I'm glad he got off the drugs, though. On Writing is my favorite work of his, followed by Misery, Dolores Claiborne, Apt Pupil, Carrie, The Boogeyman, and The Body. When he's dealing with real people in the real world, I think his work is at it's strongest. I mean, don't get me wrong, It is pretty cool, but it kind of spirals out of control.

Then there's Rose Madder, which I've never been able to finish. Or The Langoliers, which I never want to read because that movie was filled with cliches. They Always Come Back was weird and made little to no sense, kind of like The Lawnmower Man. I think he's written so much stuff and made such a name for himself that he'll just publish anything, including novels that "we" would trunk.

Wish I had more time to read his other stuff, but, for me, he's either really good or really bad. His prose is pretty consistent, but his ideas, characters, etc... go on either end of the spectrum. I tend to stick to his horror/contemporary stuff, though. I just don't think he has enough control to write sci-fi/fantasy.

KellyAssauer
01-28-2012, 11:58 PM
I can safely say that I've never noticed any differences in early King writing to late King writing. :D

shhhh Kelly! That's because you refuse to read him...

Marumae
01-29-2012, 12:10 AM
I used to be a giant King fan, ever since I first read (and it remains my favorite, not just out of the rose tinted nostalgia glasses) Pet Semetary, because the way the story is crafted, the characters and the emotions. The Creeds feel like a real family and that makes the tragedies in it all the more palpable, beside the fact that it's one of the few books I found genuinely scary as it hits me in a way some other books haven't. There's been a lot of tragic death in my family (and death of pets, I was about Ellie's Age when I lost my first pet) and it's great to sit back and wonder, even today after I lost someone close to me last year, "Would I use the burial ground?" It's sort of theraputic, which makes no sense...

But I can understand why someone can't read it, I imagine when I have a kid of my own I'll feel the same way about it.Continuing on about the Pet thing, I read Cujo once and it remains to me one of the best written suspensful stories ever. The movie was on tv a few weeks ago and I rewatched it and was at the edge of my seat even then.Misery, I read once and that was enough for me, weirdly that's a King favorite for a lot of people but I wasn't as fond of it? IDK. The Stand, I liked certainly, when I'm feeling misanthropic I pick it up, LOL.I read it a couple of times when I was working at Wal-Mart, big surprise?

Loved 'Salem's Lot, love it when I want some old fashioned vampires and can't deal with the...Victorian-ness of Dracula. The Tommy Knockers, it was so cheesey but I actually liked the movie translation of that, the actors were a help. The book, was down right disturbing. I really need to read It, I haven't yet for some reason. I feel like I'm mising something!I also unironically loved Rose Madder, I'm fascinated with the concepts of 'alternate realities' and 'alternate selves' so I was all over it.

When he got off the booze and drugs I did still like his works, (not all of them) but most of them. I think I was one of the few who actually liked Dreamcatcher, after that though, he became most a miss for me. I had a hard time with Duma Key and Lisey's Story simply because.. of the tone, it seemed like King at his most intropsective and when he gets too deep into that I loose interest.

Tried Under the Dome, a scene in the beginning weirdly threw me off it. Insomnia, eeeh...I couldn't really get into. Despite loving the change, that the main charater was an elderly gentlemen. So it's not that I think his creativity went down when he became sober, or that he got bitter, or anything, but there does seem to be a difference between the two Kings to me. When he was on drugs as well as drinking, his writing feels more-not natural or flowing but it feels less restrained I guess, more emotional, more free flowing. While when he's sober his writing doesn't feel necessairly restrained but more within certain confines, this isn't to say he's writing with certain tropes but it feels more strictly constructed rather than his older work.

Not all of his older work I liked, I hated Carrie and The Dark Half but I appreciate the plot and what he was trying to accomplish.

crunchyblanket
01-29-2012, 12:26 AM
I really need to read It, I haven't yet for some reason. I feel like I'm mising something!

My crippling fear of clowns has pretty much put paid to me ever reading that book. Which is a real shame.

shaldna
01-29-2012, 12:34 AM
I will admit that, even though I am NOT a King fan, this thread has forced me to re-read the Langoliers

firedrake
01-29-2012, 12:45 AM
I will admit that, even though I am NOT a King fan, this thread has forced me to re-read the Langoliers

I read The Langoliers on a Transatlantic flight. It freaked me out just a bit.

rugcat
01-29-2012, 01:22 AM
I read The Langoliers on a Transatlantic flight. It freaked me out just a bit.I read The Shining when I worked at ski lodge, where I was the only one there, caretaking one weekend during pre season.

An early blizzard hit, closed the road to the canyon, and we were interlodged. (Meaning due to avalanche danger, no one was allowed out of whatever building they were staying at.)

Sat in front of a roaring fire, snow dumping and wind howling outside, reading away. Then the phone rang.

It was an automated message system telling me there was a problem with the boiler down in the east wing boiler room. I needed to check it out --far away, at the end of some long corridors.

This is 100% true.

But as far as King goes, it's really hard to make a correlation between pre and post sobriety. It's not that cut and dried. Any author who has a decades long career, who's written that many books, is going to have an arc. It will have ups and downs. Not everything is going to be a success, in literary terms -- you can't keep progressing so that every novel you write is better than the last one.

Part of it is just life changes one goes through, whether involving something like substance abuse, or relationships, or something as common as watching your kids grow up. All these things are going to affect your work.

Then there's the difference between an early writer, full of fresh ideas and energy, and an older writer, more skilled in craft, perhaps, but also less urgent. Most of us are lucky to have two or three great ideas -- how'd you like to try to sustain your creative imagination over 50 or so novels? Not to mention short stories.

So I think you can assess Kings career in many ways, and his abuse problems are certainly relevant, but dividing it up into pre and post abuse is just too limited to be useful.

underthecity
01-29-2012, 05:49 PM
Of all the King books I've read, there are only few I have read only once, never wanting to read again. Tommyknockers was one of those. Yes it was creepy, but, ugh, I didn't like it when I was reading it and I've never wanted to revisit it. Then years later I learned it was one of those King wrote during his coke years. Does it show? I don't know. I think a lot of prolific writers will have their good and bad years, drugs or not. To me, Tommyknockers was a bad book, but I can't comment whether the coke had a bearing on it or not. At its heart, it's pure classic King.

Like the aforementioned Cujo. One that King said in On Writing (and mentioned in this thread) that he doesn't even remember writing. But I didn't think it was bad. Again, pure King. An absolutely memorable story with equally memorable characters. But written during a coke-fueled frenzy. Does it show? Honestly I can't tell.

In his pre-coke, but alcoholic years he did Christine. Christine was the very first King book I read, which I did in eighth grade. I loved it. I still do. And the next one I read was The Shining, which today is said in some circles to be a "literary novel." Again, pre-coke days, but fueled by alcohol. I love The Shining and still enjoy re-reading my favorite parts.



I'm in the minority when it comes to the film of The Shining. For me, the book had a lot of heart in it. Kubrick's film had no heart at all for me. It looked great but there wasn't much below the surface. Kubrick's film is one of my all-time favorite movies. Under the surface is a lot of interesting subtext and symbolism, and it has inspired a lot of discussion and analysis. Sure, it took a left turn away from the heart of the book, but a whole lot of films do that to the source material.

I kept reading King as I grew up, but to be honest, Bag of Bones was the last one I read. And I never finished it, I don't remember why exactly. To me, it wasn't quite the same as Christine or Pet Sematary, and the little girl always shouting about "VBS!" just drove me nuts. Since Bag, I haven't wanted to read another one by him, even though he was one of the authors who inspired me to write.

mirandashell
01-30-2012, 12:46 AM
The last one I bought and really enjoyed was Gerald's Game. I loved that book. It seriously freaked me out.

I just checked a bibliography and Dolores Claiborne was the next one. I quite liked that but it isn't a favourite. Then Rose Madder which I hated. Insomnia I didn't like much. I loved the Green Mile. Especially in serial form. It was so nice waiting for the next one to come out. And then..... Bag of Bones. I hated that so much I've never bought another one.

shaldna
01-30-2012, 12:46 AM
Interesting how many of us loved Pet Sematery.

mirandashell
01-30-2012, 12:48 AM
I've never actually read that one. My absolute favourite is Salem's Lot. I loved that book. Read it over and over. It's so damn creepy.

Hated the film though.

firedrake
01-30-2012, 01:03 AM
I love Salem's Lot too. I read it all in one sitting. I finished it at 3.00 in the morning and I was alone in the house because my parents were away for the weekend. I slept with the lights on and a cross under my pillow, convinced some floaty vampire would start scratching at my window, demanding an invitation.

I enjoyed the first TV adaptation of SL, with David Soul. It was well done and very creepy.

elindsen
01-30-2012, 01:08 AM
He said he was absolutely surprised when that film came out, because he'd been fiddling around with Under the Dome for decades by then.
Okay, so I had to Amazon it and see when it came out. It says 2010. Who hasn't seen The Simpsons? Yep, he ripped them off ;)

underthecity
01-30-2012, 01:25 AM
I slept with the lights on and a cross under my pillow, convinced some floaty vampire would start scratching at my window, demanding an invitation.

I enjoyed the first TV adaptation of SL, with David Soul. It was well done and very creepy. Slightly off topic. After the TV movie came out when I was a kid, it seemed like EVERYONE saw it. All of us were freaked out by the kid vampire floating outside the window, and we would rake the air with our fingernails at each other, going, "eeeek eeeek eeeek eeeek." Anyone else do that?

virtue_summer
01-30-2012, 01:40 AM
And then..... Bag of Bones. I hated that so much I've never bought another one.
I enjoyed Bag of Bones. I pick it up every now and then just to reread the bits I liked the most, like the opening. Interesting how tastes can differ.

seun
01-30-2012, 03:43 PM
I love The Shining and still enjoy re-reading my favorite parts.

Kubrick's film is one of my all-time favorite movies. Under the surface is a lot of interesting subtext and symbolism, and it has inspired a lot of discussion and analysis. Sure, it took a left turn away from the heart of the book, but a whole lot of films do that to the source material.


I can't remember who I saw say it (Peter Straub?) about the film of The Shining compared to the book. Their thought was that King wrote it from the heart and Kubrick made it from the head. As soon as I heard that, I realised that's what I'd always thought.


I love Salem's Lot too. I read it all in one sitting. I finished it at 3.00 in the morning and I was alone in the house because my parents were away for the weekend. I slept with the lights on and a cross under my pillow, convinced some floaty vampire would start scratching at my window, demanding an invitation.

I enjoyed the first TV adaptation of SL, with David Soul. It was well done and very creepy.

I love the book and the TV version of 'Salem's Lot. Creepy as hell.

crunchyblanket
01-30-2012, 03:47 PM
Ah, Salem's Lot. Back when vampires were genuinely scary, and not at all sparkly. Good days, them.

seun
01-30-2012, 04:37 PM
Not to forget James Mason. He was great in that.

Perks
01-30-2012, 04:38 PM
Okay, so I had to Amazon it and see when it came out. It says 2010. Who hasn't seen The Simpsons? Yep, he ripped them off ;)
The book came out in 2010 (The Simpson's Movie came out 2007) but he started writing it in the 1970s.

scarletpeaches
01-30-2012, 05:01 PM
James Mason was in Salem's Lot? The guy with the sexiest voice ever, besides Richard Burton's or Rupert Everett's?

That James Mason?

seun
01-30-2012, 05:12 PM
James Mason was in Salem's Lot? The guy with the sexiest voice ever, besides Richard Burton's or Rupert Everett's?

That James Mason?

Yeah, that James Mason.

I do a great impression of him. *clears throat*. "Hello, I am James Mason."

Told you it was good.

scarletpeaches
01-30-2012, 05:14 PM
I'm stunned.

No, really. This is my stunned face: :rolleyes:

crunchyblanket
01-30-2012, 05:56 PM
Yeah, that James Mason.

I do a great impression of him. *clears throat*. "Hello, I am James Mason."

Told you it was good.

*swoons*

quicklime
01-30-2012, 06:23 PM
Yeah, that James Mason.

I do a great impression of him. *clears throat*. "Hello, I am James Mason."

Told you it was good.

re-reads. twice.



Then sets book over crotch to hide how lovely Seun's voice really was.

crunchyblanket
01-30-2012, 06:27 PM
re-reads. twice.



Then sets book over crotch to hide how lovely Seun's voice really was.

:scared:

scarletpeaches
01-30-2012, 06:31 PM
Look! Look what you guys are doing to my lovely thread! :Wha:

Carry on.

Angie
01-30-2012, 06:54 PM
Pff. Like you didn't know it would come to this. :tongue

InfiniteDreamer
02-01-2012, 01:36 PM
Honestly, I haven't noticed a difference in his writing before or after his addiction. I find that he's got strong areas either way. I do agree that his short stories seem more powerful in a ways his novels don't, possibly due to the fact that there is less amount of space he has to work with.

Secret Window, Secret Garden is an excellent example as to what King can do in a short story.(And the movie was awesome as well. Definitely like that ending more.) But my favourite novel has to be Misery. I found that it had a raw edge to it that appealed to the darker side of me ;)

The ones that I could have done without reading were Under the Dome and Thinner. I found both quite boring. And the characters fell flat to me :Shrug:

scarletpeaches
02-01-2012, 03:02 PM
I started reading 11.22.63 last night and it really sucked me in. It has an air of creepy suspense to it, I think. I'm around 80 pages into it already, and that was with having other things to take care of yesterday, so even though it's a doorstopper, it looks like it'll be a quick read for me.

shaldna
02-01-2012, 07:38 PM
I started reading 11.22.63 last night and it really sucked me in. It has an air of creepy suspense to it, I think. I'm around 80 pages into it already, and that was with having other things to take care of yesterday, so even though it's a doorstopper, it looks like it'll be a quick read for me.

I've heard mixed things about it which sort of put me off, especially since i'm not a huge SK fan. Let me know if it's woth reading

seun
02-01-2012, 07:56 PM
I've heard mixed things about it which sort of put me off, especially since i'm not a huge SK fan. Let me know if it's woth reading

I'm not SP (as you may have noticed) but I will jump in here and say I thought it was one of the best things he's written in years.

Perks
02-01-2012, 07:57 PM
And I'm enjoying it at about halfway through. Good stuff.

dgrintalis
02-01-2012, 08:28 PM
I could not put 11/22/63 down. I read it in three sittings. Yes, they were long sittings... :)

scarletpeaches
02-01-2012, 08:41 PM
I'm not SP (as you may have noticed) but I will jump in here and say I thought it was one of the best things he's written in years.I have longer hair, for a start.

seun looks prettier in a dress, though.

seun
02-01-2012, 08:57 PM
I have longer hair, for a start.

seun looks prettier in a dress, though.

I hope there are more differences between us than hair length and me wearing lady clothes.

Wow. We have officially turned this into the strangest thread ever.

scarletpeaches
02-01-2012, 09:18 PM
I hope there are more differences between us than hair length and me wearing lady clothes.

Wow. We have officially turned this into the strangest thread ever.I like to think Stephen King would be proud.

quicklime
02-01-2012, 09:22 PM
I have longer hair, for a start.

seun looks prettier in a dress, though.


Mmmmmm, put on the dress, THEN say your name is James Mason, Seun

:e2brows:


:banana: :banana: :banana:

*listens to the sound of "uncomfortable"

crunchyblanket
02-01-2012, 09:33 PM
Mmmmmm, put on the dress, THEN say your name is James Mason, Seun


*swoon*

seun
02-01-2012, 10:53 PM
Filth and depravity. I'm shocked. Shocked, I tells ya.

Jamesaritchie
02-01-2012, 11:26 PM
And then..... Bag of Bones. I hated that so much I've never bought another one.

Matter of taste. I believe Bag of Bones is one of King's best books. It's also the one credited with his resurgence, and won the Bram Stoker Award, and the British Fantasy Award.

Marumae
02-01-2012, 11:46 PM
'Bag of Bones' was a complex one for me, one I had a hard time getting through and ended up not finishing. On one hand the general, feel of the books plot and storyline reminded me of 'Classic' King but the execution, felt more in line with this newer style. It might have been one of those books I simply couldn't get into but I have a friend who swears it's one of the best books she's ever read so *shrugs*.

I'm curious what are peoples thoughts about Stephen's descents into sci-fi? With Tommyknockers and...um...spoilers just to be safe *START* (Under the Dome?)**END*, and compared stories directly sort of connected to The Dark Tower universe. Is there a difference in tone or general feel of the story there? Do people prefer one over the other? I know a family friend whose a hardcore stephen king fan hates it when he brings science fiction "alien"-y plots into his books and while I disliked Tommyknockers, the others I'm not so sure about. I've noticed this with a couple other fans. Thoughts?

quicklime
02-01-2012, 11:49 PM
Matter of taste. I believe Bag of Bones is one of King's best books. It's also the one credited with his resurgence, and won the Bram Stoker Award, and the British Fantasy Award.


I also liked Bag of Bones. Immensely.

So much it made me read Rebecca, one of the few old books I truly enjoy. Also so much it made me start writing.

firedrake
02-01-2012, 11:52 PM
'Bag of Bones' was a complex one for me, one I had a hard time getting through and ended up not finishing. On one hand the general, feel of the books plot and storyline reminded me of 'Classic' King but the execution, felt more in line with this newer style. It might have been one of those books I simply couldn't get into but I have a friend who swears it's one of the best books she's ever read so *shrugs*.

I'm curious what are peoples thoughts about Stephen's descents into sci-fi? With Tommyknockers and...um...spoilers just to be safe *START* (Under the Dome?)**END*, and compared stories directly sort of connected to The Dark Tower universe. Is there a difference in tone or general feel of the story there? Do people prefer one over the other? I know a family friend whose a hardcore stephen king fan hates it when he brings science fiction "alien"-y plots into his books and while I disliked Tommyknockers, the others I'm not so sure about. I've noticed this with a couple other fans. Thoughts?

I wasn't crazy about Tommyknockers. I did enjoy Under the Dome because King redeemed himself for the awful "Cell", which always struck me as a "I'm bored, I think I'll just write something to keep busy." kind of book. I stayed away from The Dark Tower books for a long time. I didn't think I'd enjoy them then my ex boss loaned them to me and I was hooked. King has written so many books now that I think that there will be some that people will hate and others that they'll love and everyone's preferences are different as is evident by the posts in this thread.

crunchyblanket
02-01-2012, 11:57 PM
I loved the Dark Tower series, but Tommyknockers was utter shite and I was seriously underwhelmed by Under The Dome. I suppose The Stand counts as sci-fi, and to my mind it's one of the best examples of post-apocalyptic fiction out there. As for Dreamcatcher...the less said about that, the better.

And I loved Bag of Bones.

quicklime
02-02-2012, 12:01 AM
I loved the Dark Tower series, but Tommyknockers was utter shite and I was seriously underwhelmed by Under The Dome. I suppose The Stand counts as sci-fi, and to my mind it's one of the best examples of post-apocalyptic fiction out there. As for Dreamcatcher...the less said about that, the better.

And I loved Bag of Bones.


the only high point in that book, besides finishing it, was teasing my kids about "shit weasels".

the dome was interesting but felt a bit heavy-handed--he wanted an anti-obama devil in there and even though i agree with King's politics, the bad guy felt a bit less subtle than he could have been, especially if you left him as a creepy, power-mad fuck with right-leaning tendencies without going for the O-card...it just felt too "easy" or simple. Tommyknockers wasn't that great, he's said as much, but then The Stand, while I liked it, wasn't a favorite of mine either.

so, for the folks who read the Tower books, where (if ever) did you think they went off the rails? Because much as I love King, I was feeling considerably less than charitable by the end of that series.......

crunchyblanket
02-02-2012, 12:08 AM
the only high point in that book, besides finishing it, was teasing my kids about "shit weasels".


so, for the folks who read the Tower books, where (if ever) did you think they went off the rails? Because much as I love King, I was feeling considerably less than charitable by the end of that series.......

Although I love it, it's a very inconsistent series. The Gunslinger and Drawing Of The Three were superb. I enjoyed The Wasteland, although it sagged in the middle. Wizard and Glass had good moments but it was essentially an over-long flashback. I thought Wolves Of The Calla, for the most part, was excellent, and Song Of Susannah was really disappointing on the heels of that - too much nonsense. As for the last book...moments of great genius interspersed with complete WTFery (spoilers): (killing Eddie off? The big bad Mordred killed by bad horsemeat? That weird epilogue in New York?)

The ending itself, though, I really liked, although others thought it was a huge copout.

quicklime
02-02-2012, 12:12 AM
the ending was sort of rough, i didn't like it, but it could have been better without the spoilers you mentioned--it was very "Planet of the Apes" bleak, and that sort of "WTF!?!" could have worked really well I think, except there were so many other less effective "WTF!!!" moments before that, like those you mentioned, and the eraser. I think basically those took a toll on the whole "suspension of disbelief" to the point where it was on a hair-trigger when I got to the end, and that made it a harder pill to swallow.

seun
02-02-2012, 12:13 AM
I had no problem with the DT books although I can see why some aspects of them pissed people off. Under The Dome didn't do a great deal for me. It was OK but not much more than that.

scarletpeaches
02-02-2012, 12:16 AM
As for Dreamcatcher...the less said about that, the better.You shitweasel!

Amadan
02-02-2012, 12:44 AM
I'm curious what are peoples thoughts about Stephen's descents into sci-fi? With Tommyknockers and...um...spoilers just to be safe *START* (Under the Dome?)**END*, and compared stories directly sort of connected to The Dark Tower universe. Is there a difference in tone or general feel of the story there? Do people prefer one over the other? I know a family friend whose a hardcore stephen king fan hates it when he brings science fiction "alien"-y plots into his books and while I disliked Tommyknockers, the others I'm not so sure about. I've noticed this with a couple other fans. Thoughts?


I've only read The Gunslinger, and frankly, didn't like it much, so haven't gone on to read the rest of the DT series.

I think King does SF fine, though he writes a very fantastical Lovecraftian sort of sci-fi; his books always blur the line between sci-fi and fantasy (such as the psi-powers books, Carrie, The Dead Zone, and Firestarter).

Tommyknockers wasn't great, but not because of the SF elements but because he just had no discipline (or really coherent plot) while writing it.

crunchyblanket
02-02-2012, 12:51 AM
Oh Firestarter was a brilliant book. I think I was 12 when I read it. I re-read it recently and still loved it to pieces.

swvaughn
02-02-2012, 03:24 AM
so, for the folks who read the Tower books, where (if ever) did you think they went off the rails? Because much as I love King, I was feeling considerably less than charitable by the end of that series.......

WIZARD AND GLASS GRRRRRR.

I stopped right there (after I did a wallbanger with the damned thing). And once I heard what went on in the rest of the series, I was glad I did.

But FWIW, I loved Gunslinger, Drawing of the Three and Wastelands.

chickenrising
02-05-2012, 03:21 PM
The Long Walk is one of my favorites, and his most underrated.

Nostro
02-07-2012, 03:46 PM
On the original topic, I have little to say. I mostly read King for his depictions of small town America and specifically, Maine. That and the horror. I never really paid attention to the release dates, but I do think his later works are more polished.

As a random aside, has anyone noticed King randomly quoting from T.S. Eliot's Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock? He quotes the same line

"...the evening spread out against the sky like a patient etherised upon a table."

in at least three of his novels (as far as I can remember, The Stand, TommyKnockers and something else). I only mention it because each time I read said line, it totally threw me out of the story and then had me questioning why he had used the quote. Is this a recurring motif or was he just really into Eliot when he was writing those books?

As another aside. I remember reading an article on the car accident a few years ago. He was quoted as saying something to the effect that his life was worth more to the world than the driver's. That really turned me off King.

scarletpeaches
02-07-2012, 03:54 PM
The driver was a drunk (or junkie? Some kind of substance abuser) who had previously killed or injured someone.

I'd rather read the books of a substance-abusing author than cross the road in front of a substance-abusing driver.

Amadan
02-07-2012, 04:14 PM
As another aside. I remember reading an article on the car accident a few years ago. He was quoted as saying something to the effect that his life was worth more to the world than the driver's. That really turned me off King.


I am skeptical that he actually said this, or put it like that. He may really believe that (and I'd be inclined to agree with him), but King isn't stupid or arrogant enough to say something so bald as "My life is worth more to the world than his."

He talks about the accident in On Writing, and while he clearly doesn't think much of the guy who ran him over, he's surprisingly restrained.

bearilou
02-07-2012, 04:50 PM
He talks about the accident in On Writing, and while he clearly doesn't think much of the guy who ran him over, he's surprisingly restrained.

That was my impression when I read On Writing.

scarletpeaches
02-07-2012, 04:54 PM
I wouldn't grieve too much over someone who'd nearly killed me, either -- nor grieve at all over his death.

crunchyblanket
02-07-2012, 05:42 PM
The driver was a drunk (or junkie? Some kind of substance abuser) who had previously killed or injured someone.

I'd rather read the books of a substance-abusing author than cross the road in front of a substance-abusing driver.

Indeed. The guy almost killed King through his own stupidity. I wouldn't be able to find it in myself to be nice about him either.




He talks about the accident in On Writing, and while he clearly doesn't think much of the guy who ran him over, he's surprisingly restrained.


I thought that too. I'd have been a lot harsher.

KathleenD
02-07-2012, 06:55 PM
He did say "oh christ, I've nearly been killed by a character in one of my books" or something similar. I thought that was hilarious.

If he made any judgments about the value of his life versus the person who nearly killed him, he didn't do it in the already cited book or any interview I've read. He has said in at least one interview that he didn't think the guy should have been allowed to drive ever again. Which, you know, makes sense, especially from the person who will always carry scars and pins and whatnot.

Nostro
02-08-2012, 01:27 AM
I am skeptical that he actually said this, or put it like that. He may really believe that (and I'd be inclined to agree with him), but King isn't stupid or arrogant enough to say something so bald as "My life is worth more to the world than his."

He talks about the accident in On Writing, and while he clearly doesn't think much of the guy who ran him over, he's surprisingly restrained.

I agree that it's fine and perfectly normal to direct all manner of bad thoughts at the guy and plot his revenge etc. in private. Not in public when you are a major public figure. I wish I could find the quote, I'm pretty sure it was in The Guardian. Maybe I misread it, but I do remember finding it pretty distasteful and arrogant, which surprised me because he had always appeared very down to earth.

I wouldn't say his restraint in On Writing was surprising. I'd say it was the expected response of a major household name who doesn't want to alienate any fans. And even then I'd say it was disrespectful to write

"Call it fate, call it God ... But what you're left with is this guy, who has the IQ of a tomato soup can. An empty tomato soup can. "

The guy didn't do it on purpose. It was an accident. It's no excuse to write the above about a person (who I think was still living at the time) in a book that would be read by millions.

Anyway, I feel like I'm belabouring the point.

scarletpeaches
02-08-2012, 01:55 AM
The guy didn't do it on purpose. It was an accident. It's no excuse to write the above about a person (who I think was still living at the time) in a book that would be read by millions.He sure as shit didn't do anything to stop it happening, like, say...remain sober behind the wheel.

I know where my sympathy lies. And it's not with a drunk/high driver.

And the guy was dead by the time On Writing came out.

Shame.

seun
02-08-2012, 01:39 PM
I wouldn't say his restraint in On Writing was surprising. I'd say it was the expected response of a major household name who doesn't want to alienate any fans. And even then I'd say it was disrespectful to write

"Call it fate, call it God ... But what you're left with is this guy, who has the IQ of a tomato soup can. An empty tomato soup can. "

The guy didn't do it on purpose. It was an accident. It's no excuse to write the above about a person (who I think was still living at the time) in a book that would be read by millions.

It's about a million times more restrained than anything I would have said in King's position. What, he's supposed to be give a flying fuck about the guy's feelings or be nice to the man who almost killed him simply through being an arsehole?

And just for the record, getting into your vehicle shitfaced isn't an accident.

Nostro
02-08-2012, 03:00 PM
He sure as shit didn't do anything to stop it happening, like, say...remain sober behind the wheel.

I know where my sympathy lies. And it's not with a drunk/high driver.

And the guy was dead by the time On Writing came out.

Shame.


It's about a million times more restrained than anything I would have said in King's position. What, he's supposed to be give a flying fuck about the guy's feelings or be nice to the man who almost killed him simply through being an arsehole?

And just for the record, getting into your vehicle shitfaced isn't an accident.


The guy wasn't drunk or high. He was distracted by his dog was trying to get into an icebox filled with meat.

Rhoda Nightingale
02-08-2012, 03:16 PM
Just gliding by to point out that King wrote that whole incident into his televised reboot of "The Kingdom." The drunk driver does not get off easy, to say the least. I dunno which parts of it are true or which are embellished, but in the show the driver is drunk, high, and distracted by his dog.

Any thoughts on writers working their personal tragedies into their work, and vilifying the bad guys like that?

seun
02-08-2012, 03:20 PM
The guy wasn't drunk or high. He was distracted by his dog was trying to get into an icebox filled with meat.

OK. That makes him much more of a stand up guy, doesn't it?

Nostro
02-08-2012, 03:24 PM
Or it doesn't make him anything more than what he already was, a fallible person. Shit, you're annoying.

seun
02-08-2012, 03:30 PM
Or it doesn't make him anything more than what he already was, a fallible person. Shit, you're annoying.

It makes him a fucking idiot who shouldn't have been anywhere near a vehicle.

Rhoda Nightingale
02-08-2012, 03:37 PM
Or it doesn't make him anything more than what he already was, a fallible person. Shit, you're annoying.

You be civil, or you'll get slapped with a mod warning. Respect Your Fellow Writer is rule one around these parts. Disagree and debate is allowed. Name calling is not.

seun
02-08-2012, 03:45 PM
Just gliding by to point out that King wrote that whole incident into his televised reboot of "The Kingdom." The drunk driver does not get off easy, to say the least. I dunno which parts of it are true or which are embellished, but in the show the driver is drunk, high, and distracted by his dog.

Any thoughts on writers working their personal tragedies into their work, and vilifying the bad guys like that?

Sounds fair to me as long as it fits in the story and serves it rather than just being used for a whine. King used the accident as a plot in one of the DT books. I think it fit in that case - not seen The Kingdom so I can't comment on that.

bearilou
02-08-2012, 04:28 PM
Or it doesn't make him anything more than what he already was, a fallible person.

I can understand wanting to give the other person the benefit of the doubt and perhaps not be so hard on him due to an accident.

This accident did leave SK in a great deal of pain and in very bad physical shape. I'm sorry, but I can't fault SK for being a tad bitter about the whole ordeal regardless of the driver's intent.

The driver still exhibited poor judgment and still hit him; SK was still in very bad shape for a long time due to the accident. It's not up to us to pass judgment on SK on whether he should have gotten over it and been more fair to the man or not.

shaldna
02-08-2012, 04:32 PM
The guy wasn't drunk or high. He was distracted by his dog was trying to get into an icebox filled with meat.

Without wanting to further derail the thread - this is true. However, I can understand King's anger, and I'm sure most of us would all feel the same way if we, or someone we loved, had been hit and severely injured by someone who didn't have the sense to either a) restrain their dog or b) slow down when distracted.



Just gliding by to point out that King wrote that whole incident into his televised reboot of "The Kingdom." The drunk driver does not get off easy, to say the least. I dunno which parts of it are true or which are embellished, but in the show the driver is drunk, high, and distracted by his dog.

Any thoughts on writers working their personal tragedies into their work, and vilifying the bad guys like that?

I think it's a natural reaction for a lot of people. But I'd be wary of doing it incase I got sued, and in King's case it was clearly obvious who the character was based on.



Sounds fair to me as long as it fits in the story and serves it rather than just being used for a whine. King used the accident as a plot in one of the DT books. I think it fit in that case - not seen The Kingdom so I can't comment on that.

Agreed.

scarletpeaches
02-08-2012, 04:43 PM
Or it doesn't make him anything more than what he already was, a fallible person. Shit, you're annoying.I'm sure Stephen King thought the same about the guy who drove a truck over him.

Amadan
02-08-2012, 05:02 PM
Without wanting to further derail the thread - this is true. However, I can understand King's anger, and I'm sure most of us would all feel the same way if we, or someone we loved, had been hit and severely injured by someone who didn't have the sense to either a) restrain their dog or b) slow down when distracted.


Yeah, I can understand that shit happens, and sometimes you do something really stupid that lots of people do every day except today, what you did had really serious consequences. But, I think one of the reasons King felt free to be hard on the driver who hit him is that it wasn't a solitary catastrophic bit of bad luck. It turned out this guy had a record of being a dangerous driver. Also, as he describes in his book, some other drivers passed this fellow miles up the road, before he hit King, and commented on the fact that he was driving dangerously. So it wasn't a single horrible moment, it was a pattern of behavior.

As for writing that stuff into your book, I think it's fine to use events and caricatures, but kind of uncool if you're clearly using the real person as a "fictional" character. I mean, Michael Crichton famously wrote a journalist who'd criticized him into one of his books (using the real person's name) as a pedophile with a small penis. (Not saying King did that - his driver stand-in wasn't a copy of the real person.)

quicklime
02-08-2012, 05:27 PM
Yeah, I can understand that shit happens, and sometimes you do something really stupid that lots of people do every day except today, what you did had really serious consequences. But, I think one of the reasons King felt free to be hard on the driver who hit him is that it wasn't a solitary catastrophic bit of bad luck. It turned out this guy had a record of being a dangerous driver. Also, as he describes in his book, some other drivers passed this fellow miles up the road, before he hit King, and commented on the fact that he was driving dangerously. So it wasn't a single horrible moment, it was a pattern of behavior.


this.....the guy had a track record, plus how much baggage you think you'd carry after six months of rehab?

2 summers ago, we were in NY. My daughter ran up to her grandma. The lady next to her had an airdale mix under her on the park bench and the thing lunged. Our daughter was surprised, not hurt--she backed up and the dog just (barely) got a scrap of jeans. In this particular case, the lady blamed our daughter, saying she "lunged at the dog (if your dog is aggressive enough a kid running past, obliquely, 5 feet distant, elicits a response, maybe you shouldn't have it out in a park in the middle of fucking New York). Then she became obnoxious, encouraging us to tell the police. We did, and she got a $1000 or $2000 ticket (I was floored at that, but she had it coming; had our kid been 3, the dog might have scarred her for life). Anyway, the point is, that became very personal. My wife nearly beat the piss out of this lady, like I got between them, despite my stmpathies being with her. If you honestly believe a dude who had multiple citations and was all over the road before he finally managed to nearly kill you and fuck you up for life wouldn't elicit that sort of anger in you, either you are a much better person than I am or you lead a uniquely naive and insular life.
QUOTE]

crunchyblanket
02-08-2012, 05:48 PM
If you honestly believe a dude who had multiple citations and was all over the road before he finally managed to nearly kill you and fuck you up for life wouldn't elicit that sort of anger in you, either you are a much better person than I am or you lead a uniquely naive and insular life.



QFT.



Any thoughts on writers working their personal tragedies into their work, and vilifying the bad guys like that?


It depends. If the person is legitimately a bad person, or has legimately done a bad thing, I guess I don't have an issue with it.

Nostro
02-08-2012, 09:17 PM
Yeah, I can understand that shit happens, and sometimes you do something really stupid that lots of people do every day except today, what you did had really serious consequences. But, I think one of the reasons King felt free to be hard on the driver who hit him is that it wasn't a solitary catastrophic bit of bad luck. It turned out this guy had a record of being a dangerous driver. Also, as he describes in his book, some other drivers passed this fellow miles up the road, before he hit King, and commented on the fact that he was driving dangerously. So it wasn't a single horrible moment, it was a pattern of behavior.


this.....the guy had a track record, plus how much baggage you think you'd carry after six months of rehab?

2 summers ago, we were in NY. My daughter ran up to her grandma. The lady next to her had an airdale mix under her on the park bench and the thing lunged. Our daughter was surprised, not hurt--she backed up and the dog just (barely) got a scrap of jeans. In this particular case, the lady blamed our daughter, saying she "lunged at the dog (if your dog is aggressive enough a kid running past, obliquely, 5 feet distant, elicits a response, maybe you shouldn't have it out in a park in the middle of fucking New York). Then she became obnoxious, encouraging us to tell the police. We did, and she got a $1000 or $2000 ticket (I was floored at that, but she had it coming; had our kid been 3, the dog might have scarred her for life). Anyway, the point is, that became very personal. My wife nearly beat the piss out of this lady, like I got between them, despite my stmpathies being with her. If you honestly believe a dude who had multiple citations and was all over the road before he finally managed to nearly kill you and fuck you up for life wouldn't elicit that sort of anger in you, either you are a much better person than I am or you lead a uniquely naive and insular life.
QUOTE]


I can understand wanting to give the other person the benefit of the doubt and perhaps not be so hard on him due to an accident.

This accident did leave SK in a great deal of pain and in very bad physical shape. I'm sorry, but I can't fault SK for being a tad bitter about the whole ordeal regardless of the driver's intent.

The driver still exhibited poor judgment and still hit him; SK was still in very bad shape for a long time due to the accident. It's not up to us to pass judgment on SK on whether he should have gotten over it and been more fair to the man or not.


Without wanting to further derail the thread - this is true. However, I can understand King's anger, and I'm sure most of us would all feel the same way if we, or someone we loved, had been hit and severely injured by someone who didn't have the sense to either a) restrain their dog or b) slow down when distracted.


Of course I'd be angry, you'd have to be a saint not to be, especially in the immediate aftermath of the incident. My point is I'd be slow to act on that anger in public when I discovered my 'adversary' was living in a trailer on disability benefit and possibly had cognitive difficulties. Despite my massive injuries and long recuperation time, I'd hope I'd be the bigger person and let it go. Especially when I'm a multi-millionaire author known throughout the world.

But really, unless anyone of us finds ourselves in that exact situation we're just hypothesising. I'm happy to agree to disagree.

Nostro
02-08-2012, 09:18 PM
I'm sure Stephen King thought the same about the guy who drove a truck over him.

Lol

quicklime
02-08-2012, 09:23 PM
Of course I'd be angry, you'd have to be a saint not to be, especially in the immediate aftermath of the incident. My point is I'd be slow to act on that anger in public when I discovered my 'adversary' was living in a trailer on disability benefit and possibly had cognitive difficulties. Despite my massive injuries and long recuperation time, I'd hope I'd be the bigger person and let it go. Especially when I'm a multi-millionaire author known throughout the world.

But really, unless anyone of us finds ourselves in that exact situation we're just hypothesising. I'm happy to agree to disagree.


we can agree to disagree, and I get the whole cognitive thing....at the same time there is the whole "why the fuck did this dude still have a license?" issue. I don't know what you saw, all I saw was what was in On Writing, and I'd have probably shown more anger than he did (in there) over a single busted leg. So, if King did go really pissy later, I can get both the "hell, I'd be pissed too" and also the "don't bash a mentally retarded guy" sides of the argument, but in On Writing at least, I thought he kept his shit pretty locked down.....mine wmight have gone stratospheric.

Nostro
02-08-2012, 09:52 PM
we can agree to disagree, and I get the whole cognitive thing....at the same time there is the whole "why the fuck did this dude still have a license?" issue. I don't know what you saw, all I saw was what was in On Writing, and I'd have probably shown more anger than he did (in there) over a single busted leg. So, if King did go really pissy later, I can get both the "hell, I'd be pissed too" and also the "don't bash a mentally retarded guy" sides of the argument, but in On Writing at least, I thought he kept his shit pretty locked down.....mine wmight have gone stratospheric.

The Guardian printed excerpts from On Writing and the car accident was one of them. I just read it yesterday along with an article on the driver's death when I had a quick look for that quote I originally wrote about. And you're right he probably shouldn't have had a license at the time of the accident.

Re. working people you've had run-ins with into your writing. I'd be surprised if most writers didn't do it. Same goes for painters of frescos, e.g. Michaelangelo painting his enemies into the Sistine Chapel.

scarletpeaches
02-08-2012, 10:12 PM
Somebody told me I should put my mother in my books. Sheesh. I write erotic romance. Talk about a turn-off. Besides, when I finish my other-genre, agent-bait novel, there's no way in Hades I want that bitch anywhere near the book of my heart.

Anyhoo, back on topic...I wouldn't give a damn if someone was living in a trailer and on disability, if they ran me over. His home life doesn't exempt him from knowing right from wrong.

Where I come from, running people over is wrong. And how the hell could he afford to run a vehicle on disability, anyway?!

shaldna
02-09-2012, 01:35 AM
My point is I'd be slow to act on that anger in public when I discovered my 'adversary' was living in a trailer on disability benefit and possibly had cognitive difficulties.

With all due respect, this is the sort of opinion that only contributes to the 'oh poor me, broken home, disability, let me off with my crime' attitude that we see so often.

His personal circumstances should NEVER be taken into consideration. Okay, so this time he knocked over Stephen King. What if next time he hits your pregnant sister? Or your five year old child? or an old lady crossing the street? Should all be forgiven because he is poor and disabled?

I work in government and I hear this sort of thing trotted out every single day 'but i'm disabled' and 'i live on benefits' or 'he comes from a broken home' are the excuses that are presented when folks doe something illegal and get caught. well I WAS one of those people, living on benefits in govt provided accommodation and NOT ONCE did I use it as an excuse.

If he is not cognitively able to drive then he shouldn't be driving. simple.


Despite my massive injuries and long recuperation time, I'd hope I'd be the bigger person and let it go. Especially when I'm a multi-millionaire author known throughout the world.

I, my husband and my four year old daughter were recently in a car accident caused by negligence on the part of the Road Service. I was pretty badly injured and had to take a long time off work, my husband hasn't driven since because he's scared and my car was wrecked. Should I be the bigger person or should I tackle the neglicence that caused that problem?

It's not always easy to let things go.

Okay, there are accidents that are just that. Accidents. But when someone is doing something stupid, well, that's a different story.

crunchyblanket
02-09-2012, 01:38 AM
Where I come from, running people over is wrong.

I thought it was a national sport?

scarletpeaches
02-09-2012, 01:59 AM
I thought it was a national sport?No, you're getting confused with the 100 yard dash to vomit on a policeman.

swvaughn
02-09-2012, 02:44 AM
No, you're getting confused with the 100 yard dash to vomit on a policeman.

I'm moving over there. You have way better sports than us. :D

shaldna
02-09-2012, 03:17 AM
No, you're getting confused with the 100 yard dash to vomit on a policeman.

You can see this on 'Cops on Camera' (or in any UK city) each night,

Christyp
02-09-2012, 07:50 PM
Nosmo King? Geddit?

*sigh* Anyhoo...

This is inspired by the Books You've Thrown Across the Room with Force thread in the Novels forum, and the conversation about Stephen King which began around about this page (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47391&page=42).

I've only read a handful of King books -- Rose Madder, Bag of Bones, Dreamcatcher and a few others, and I wouldn't call myself a mad keen King afficionado.

Those who are more familiar than I with his work have referenced a difference between his 'too stoned to remember writing this shit, 'cause man, I was off my tits' books and his 'clean and sober' works.

I was just wondering what yous guys thought about this. Is there a difference between the two Kings? Do you think the drink and drugs made his books better or worse? Had no effect?

For those who see a difference, what exactly would you say that difference is? Were his books darker back then? More psychological now?

Which of his books would you say best illustrate this difference, if there is one?

Uh, yeah. I totally just got the Nosmo thing. Did I mention I'm naturally blonde?

bearilou
02-09-2012, 08:16 PM
Uh, yeah. I totally just got the Nosmo thing. Did I mention I'm naturally blonde?

Even though I got it, I still want to parse it as Nos-mo instead of No-smo...

chickenrising
02-12-2012, 08:32 AM
I don't get it.

aadams73
02-14-2012, 03:40 AM
It's fascinating to me that Bryan Smith (the guy who hit King) died on King's birthday. How very Twilight Zone.

InfiniteDreamer
02-14-2012, 11:01 AM
It's fascinating to me that Bryan Smith (the guy who hit King) died on King's birthday. How very Twilight Zone.

:chair that's just creepy.

HoneyBadger
02-20-2012, 03:57 AM
I thought everyone knew that every bad Stephen King book was actually written by Tabitha.

;)

scarletpeaches
02-20-2012, 03:59 AM
Finished 11.22.63 this week and had a lump in my throat at the end.

Kitty27
02-20-2012, 04:07 AM
I used to be quite the SK fangirl and ready to cut bitches across cyberspace about him.

The magical Negro mess in "The Green Mile" and "Shawshank Redemption" movies quite annoyed me.

Other than that,I adore him. He is one of the best writers ever and I still stan for him,though not as quite as badly as I did in the past.

I also think it is extremely freaky that the guy who hit him died on his bday.

CallyW
02-20-2012, 08:29 PM
I read three SK novels. The Stand, ending really really annoyed me, It, ending really really annoyed me, and the Green Mile, ending really really annoyed me.

After that I gave up.

Dr.Gonzo
02-20-2012, 08:36 PM
I read three SK novels. The Stand, ending really really annoyed me, It, ending really really annoyed me, and the Green Mile, ending really really annoyed me.

After that I gave up.

He has many WTF endings. The last page turns round and golden showers all the other pages. Pisses all over the rest of the book. Smiling while it does it. 'I am pissing on you,' the last page says.

seun
02-21-2012, 03:24 PM
I used to be quite the SK fangirl and ready to cut bitches across cyberspace about him.

The magical Negro mess in "The Green Mile" and "Shawshank Redemption" movies quite annoyed me.


I'm with you when it comes to The Green Mile (didn't really like the book or the film). Red in Shawshank didn't really strike me as a Magical Negro character, though.

Mr Flibble
02-21-2012, 03:47 PM
Red in Shawshank didn't really strike me as a Magical Negro character, though.

In the book he wasn't black. Was he? I'm doubting my memory now....

scarletpeaches
02-21-2012, 03:54 PM
He wasn't, as I recall. Wasn't he a redheaded Irishman? Hence the nickname.

Dr.Gonzo
02-21-2012, 04:04 PM
Yeah, that's how I remember it.

seun
02-21-2012, 04:14 PM
In the book he wasn't black. Was he? I'm doubting my memory now....


He wasn't, as I recall. Wasn't he a redheaded Irishman? Hence the nickname.

From what I remember, he was named Red (in the story)due to his hair colour. Morgan Freeman makes a comment about being Irish in the film but it always struck me as him making a small joke.

Mr Flibble
02-21-2012, 04:58 PM
To be fair, it is possible to be black and Irish (Interviewer to Phil Lynott: So, what's it like to be black and Irish? Phil Lynott: Ask a pint of Guinness. lol)

And I used to know a black guy --a Scots mum and a dad from Sierra Leone--and he had naturally red hair. (And freckles). Though that's pretty rare, I think.

But it was my impression that Red was white. Or maybe I was making those assumptions again... (I think it's a fair assumption to make, without any other evidence, because it'd be true 99.9999% of the time)

seun
02-21-2012, 05:01 PM
To be fair, it is possible to be black and Irish (Interviewer to Phil Lynott: So, what's it like to be black and Irish? Phil Lynott: Ask a pint of Guinness. lol)

And I used to know a black guy --a Scots mum and a dad from Sierra Leone--and he had naturally red hair. (And freckles). Though that's pretty rare, I think.

But it was my impression that Red was white.

Absolutely.

I think it's Freeman's delivery of the line in the film that makes me think he's joking.

Mr Flibble
02-21-2012, 05:03 PM
It might be a nod to the book?

Dr.Gonzo
02-21-2012, 05:14 PM
That was my understanding of it.

seun
02-21-2012, 05:29 PM
It might be a nod to the book?

Very probably.

And now I want a pint of Guinness.

scarletpeaches
02-21-2012, 06:41 PM
You'll be able to buy green Guinness on the 17th March.

Morgan Freeman as a leprechaun; now there's something we'd all pay good money to see.

quicklime
02-21-2012, 07:05 PM
I used to be quite the SK fangirl and ready to cut bitches across cyberspace about him.

The magical Negro mess in "The Green Mile" and "Shawshank Redemption" movies quite annoyed me.

Other than that,I adore him. He is one of the best writers ever and I still stan for him,though not as quite as badly as I did in the past.

I also think it is extremely freaky that the guy who hit him died on his bday.

as others mentioned downthread, I think Shawshank got "magical negro-ized" in Hollywood. (side note, I just heard the term Magical Negro" on NPR for the first time early this year.....)

as for TGM, King is very liberal. And I think he really is sensitive to race...maybe that's what messed things up--for me, I try to never blame my wife's moods on periods, pretend I know what it would be like to survive a rape, or (and I apologize, I know the comparisons are also un-flattering) to be born gay or as a minority and judged on skin color or orientation.

That doesn't mean I will only have white people in my books, but it does mean I can totally see fucking it up, either out of a sort of cluelessness and naivete or out of a sort of apologist slant. I get you being offended, and I think I can understand why his stuff came out that way....it is a somewhat difficult line to walk. I suspect he did a bit of apologist preaching and that was the end result.

seun
02-21-2012, 07:15 PM
You'll be able to buy green Guinness on the 17th March.


Derail - the whole non-Irish people getting shit faced and supposedly acting Irish thing makes me cringe all over.

End derail. Carry on.

quicklime
02-21-2012, 07:24 PM
Derail - the whole non-Irish people getting shit faced and supposedly acting Irish thing makes me cringe all over.

End derail. Carry on.



you potato-farmers don't have a monopoly on alcoholism




honestly, I'm sort of with you; I think it is just an excuse to drink, but here in WI with maybe 10% of the state having some Irish ancestry the bars still get packed to capacity by like nine in the morning. Yet there's a shit-ton og German and Polish ancestry here, and there are Oktoberfest celebrations, but nothing like St. Pattys.... One day out of the year, everybody wants to be Irish (then we remember what Irish people are really like) :tongue

Mr Flibble
02-21-2012, 07:46 PM
as for TGM, King is very liberal. And I think he really is sensitive to race...maybe that's what messed things up--for me, I try to never blame my wife's moods on periods, pretend I know what it would be like to survive a rape, or (and I apologize, I know the comparisons are also un-flattering) to be born gay or as a minority and judged on skin color or orientation.

That doesn't mean I will only have white people in my books, but it does mean I can totally see fucking it up, either out of a sort of cluelessness and naivete or out of a sort of apologist slant. I get you being offended, and I think I can understand why his stuff came out that way....it is a somewhat difficult line to walk. I suspect he did a bit of apologist preaching and that was the end result.

*SPOILERS*
The thing with the Green Mile - if John had been white, would everyone have been so quick to assume it was him what done it (the crime he was accused of)? Would iut have been as easy to get him convicted with such flimsy evidence? Probably not, not in the time and place that occurred - Depression era (IIRC?) southern states. So while, yes, only having black people who are Magical is problematic (but better than all the black people being evil? Discuss lol) here it was sort of relevant to the plot and setting, and how everyone treated him, and maybe even a subtle little commentary . Or maybe I'm talking outta my arse again. :D

I agree it's a damn fine line. And I can see me fucking it up good and proper too...

ETA: England v Ireland on ST Patrick's day? Man, that's not fair....

Dr.Gonzo
02-21-2012, 08:30 PM
It's a shame some people need an excuse to get wankered.

InfiniteDreamer
02-23-2012, 06:20 PM
He has many WTF endings. The last page turns round and golden showers all the other pages. Pisses all over the rest of the book. Smiling while it does it. 'I am pissing on you,' the last page says.

That's exactly how I felt after watching his movie The Mist (no pun intended ;) ) I was like WTF at the end. I was livid to the point where I contemplated sending hate mail lol

J.W. Alden
02-23-2012, 08:28 PM
That's exactly how I felt after watching his movie The Mist (no pun intended ;) ) I was like WTF at the end. I was livid to the point where I contemplated sending hate mail lol

Actually, they changed the ending for the movie version of The Mist. The original story doesn't end anything like that.

InfiniteDreamer
02-23-2012, 10:39 PM
Actually, they changed the ending for the movie version of The Mist. The original story doesn't end anything like that.

Really? :o I must find out how it actually ended :gone:

Paul
02-24-2012, 01:59 AM
From what I remember, he was named Red (in the story)due to his hair colour. Morgan Freeman makes a comment about being Irish in the film but it always struck me as him making a small joke.
You haven't seen the Commitments then?

I must confess to two things.

One: The Shinning scared the life outta me, so i stopped reading it.


Two: Dreamcatchers is crap.



that is all.

Paul
02-24-2012, 02:03 AM
you potato-farmers don't have a monopoly on alcoholism




honestly, I'm sort of with you; I think it is just an excuse to drink, but here in WI with maybe 10% of the state having some Irish ancestry the bars still get packed to capacity by like nine in the morning. Yet there's a shit-ton og German and Polish ancestry here, and there are Oktoberfest celebrations, but nothing like St. Pattys.... One day out of the year, everybody wants to be Irish (then we remember what Irish people are really like) :tongue
lol. you mean the ugliness dont you? :D


and it St. Paddy's Day.
Never, never ,never St. Patty's. NEVER.